Category talk:Images (Mikhail)
I'm drawing a blank right now, but I think there is a policy that establishes a minimum of images in order to create an image category. Perhaps Blue Rook or Acer can shed some light on it, but I honestly don't see the need for an image category if it will only hold a handful of images. Same applies to the Eric Rayburn one. Thief12 (talk) 00:37, March 17, 2015 (UTC) :Any category should be helpful if one is looking for pictures of a character from the show. Now, if it's any of these various character or locations, then that's where it gets into being included based on actor, dialogue, name, etc. and gets sketchy. Three to four of a character should be more than adequate and there might very well be pictures of the character in the future. :Max, a key character who has limited episode appearances also only have five images that can be found of him.--Gunman6 (talk) 00:42, March 17, 2015 (UTC) ::The current policy is on the Category:Images_(characters) page which states the character must appear in more than 1 episode, be significant to the plot and hold at least 4 images. At the minute this category just fits the criteria (despite one of the images just having Mikhail as a blur in the corner)--Acer4666 (talk) 22:45, March 17, 2015 (UTC) :::Almost any character in any show could be indicated as being significant (save for Kim Bauer) so we might want to build upon what is or isn't significant here or for future reference.--Gunman6 (talk) 23:35, March 17, 2015 (UTC) ::::I suppose that the criteria for characters being "significant" might be a bit subjective, but I still think many of the categories you are creating for supporting characters are unnecessary and don't fit the "significant" criteria, or even the third criteria that states images should be "taken from different scenes". I really don't see a need for image categories for characters like Remick or Rouse, for example, that have little to no bearing to the plot and having those categories just clogs the list of categories. But that's just me. I'm willing to hear further justification. Thief12 (talk) 15:02, March 29, 2015 (UTC) :::::Rouse's serves the same purpose much like Cole and Marcus's existence and that is to have further conflict and resistance between Jack saving Kate and rescuing the microchip (granted, you could say any character serves as conflict on this plot-driven show). Remick is one of the few recurring FBI characters who while minuscule in appearances serves as one of the field agents who reports to Larry Moss. Again, it's already annoying having to search around for images of the characters so I don't see why additional character categories should be excluded unless they're for unnamed characters (in which case, they shouldn't be added to begin with) or characters who were only in one episode for only a few seconds worth. Henchman and CTU workers I consider fair game regardless on whether or not the character is a popular, memorable or significant one, someone will want to know more about them given that we are a wikia by default. :::::I also noticed that we originally had only less than four images for characters like Alexander Trepkos but that's no longer the case anymore now that other images have been uploaded and tagged recently. If we need to just flat out go through all the character categories on one week and decide which ones to include/exclude, I'm all in favor of that. Overall, when you make a character image category like this, please remember to actually link it inside the article, otherwise no one will ever see it. Like this: see this diff; create a "See also" heading underneath the "Live appearances" template, and link the image template. Additionally, there is a handy template for the image category itself: (see this diff). Also while I have the opportunity Gunman please sign posts and remember to use the colons consistently with paragraph breaks in a single post? (Forgetting colons in between paragraphs makes it look like someone else responded below your post and forces editors to consult the history page to or write confused replies. You can see the correction I mean by checking the diff of my edit here to make this reply.) 19:59, April 27, 2015 (UTC)